OF THE BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY. LXVII 



to widely diffused arts of this character, the utilities and pur- 

 poses of which are obvious, it is usually assumed that they are 

 autogenous in different regions among different peoples, that 

 they may have developed from several centers ; and this would 

 not exclude the hypothesis that many tribes learned such arts 

 by imitation, i. e., by acculturation. 



Now let us suppose that the stone arrow-head art had been 

 discovered only in one tribe, say in British America, and that 

 it was generally supposed to be peculiar to such tribe. Then 

 suppose further that an anthropologist should discover this same 

 art in a tribe of Mexico. Under such circumstances the first in- 

 terpretation put upon it would be that these two tribes originally 

 constituted one people, and that the art practiced by them was 

 inherited from common ancestors. Seeking for further confir- 

 mation of this, if it was found that the two peoples spoke the 

 same language, or allied languages, this hypothesis would be 

 strengthened; if it was found that they had other arts in common, 

 that their institutions were alike in many respects, and that their 

 mvthologies were substantially the same, the view that the two 

 tribes belong to the same stock would be accepted. But if no 

 other important affinities between the tribes were discovered, 

 such a theory would be abandoned, and explanation would be 

 sought elsewhere. The next most plausible hypothesis would 

 be that these peoples had been associated, and that one had 

 acquired the art from the other. But if no evidence was dis- 

 covered of a former association, the anthropologist would seek 

 for explanation of the common art in the environment, the con- 

 ditions of life surrounding the two peoples, supposing that these 

 instances of the practice of a common art had a common cause. 



Among the Iroquoian Indians the members of a tribe or of a 

 clan are accustomed to address each other by kinship terms, 

 and it is considered an offense to address a man by his proper 

 name. In these kinship terms this peculiarity is discovered, 

 that a kinship name conveys also an idea of relative age. This 

 is very simple in the case of father and son, or in the case 

 of uncle and nephew; but for the common noun "brother" 

 two terms are used, one signifying elder brother and the other 

 younger brother. For the common noun "cousin" two terms 



